Federers backhand - a professional coach answers on quora..

  • Thread starter Deleted member 55539
  • Start date

bjsnider

Hall of Fame
Nadal wasn't going to win all the slams he missed anyway. Which of them do you think would he have won? I'll jump in:

2004 FO. - NO

2006 AO - NO

2009 Wimb - unlikely with the draw he would have got consisting of Hewitt, Roddick, Murray and Federer. That would have been a nightmare draw.

2012 USO - possible

2013 AO - NO. He's not beating Djokovic.

2014 USO - possible. But could have been hit off the court by Cilic too.

2016 Wimb - NO
How about 2010 AO? He was far an away the best player that year.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
How about 2010 AO? He was far an away the best player that year.
Well, counting the slams he did play in which he was injured:

2010 AO - NO. He was in good shape in the first 2 sets against Murray and he still lost them. Not coming back from 2 sets down even if healthy.

2011 AO - NO. Not beating Djokovic.


2016 FO - unlikely. Not beating Djokovic.

Honorable mention: 2009 FO. But I'm not sure how much of that was due to him being injured. Soderling was really on fire and Nadal was still somewhat running like a rabbit.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Not so sure about that. Nadal has dominated the entire tour, excluding no one, for periods of time, eg. 2018. Federer has dominated the tour excluding Nadal, for periods. Also, Navratilova switched racket tech a year earlier than Evert, which somewhat affects their results in the 1984-1985 time frame. When you're playing with small, flexible wood and gut against large, stiff graphite, you're at an extreme disadvantage in most situations.

Nadal has never dominated the entire tour in a single year. No one has since Rod Laver.

Did you mean 2008 instead of 2018? Nadal lost both HC grand slam SF to Tsonga and Murray.
 
D

Deleted member 733170

Guest
Nadal has never dominated the entire tour in a single year. No one has since Rod Laver.

Did you mean 2008 instead of 2018? Nadal lost both HC grand slam SF to Tsonga and Murray.

Actually I disagree with that statement in your first paragraph. Others players have clearly dominated the tour.

Laver's CYGS has been hyped to some sort of Herculean feat. The way the CYGS is glorified reminds me of a child collecting a rare Panini sticker. What Federer did in some of his best years and what Novak did in recent years is in many ways more impressive than what Laver achieved, given the tour in his day was a shadow of what it has become.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Actually I disagree with that statement in your first paragraph. Others players have clearly dominated the tour.

Laver's CYGS has been hyped to some sort of Herculean feat. The way the CYGS is glorified reminds me of a child collecting a rare Panini sticker. What Federer did in some of his best years and what Novak did in recent years is in many ways more impressive than what Laver achieved, given the tour in his day was a shadow of what it has become.

Well it was in response to the message I quoted which claimed Fed dominated everyone but Nadal, which is true. But then he claims Nadal had periods of dominating every single player. Which is cleary untrue as he hasn't done the CYGS.

Agree on that last part.
 

bjsnider

Hall of Fame
Nadal has never dominated the entire tour in a single year. No one has since Rod Laver.

Did you mean 2008 instead of 2018? Nadal lost both HC grand slam SF to Tsonga and Murray.
Now we're interrogating the definition of "dominated the entire tour for periods of time". If your definition prevails, ie. winning all four slams, then yes, only Laver. That was not my definition, because it would be too exclusive and therefore not much help. I was also not saying Nadal had won every tournament and every match, because obviously that would exclude every case in history. I was using Federer's 2006, in which he beat everyone except Nadal, who he couldn't beat even once, and Murray, who, IIRC, he managed one victory and one loss. The latter matchup was obviously inconclusive, but the 0-5 against Nadal isn't.

I'm saying that Nadal went through a few seasons, such as 2008, 2010, and 2013, where no one player was good enough to consistently beat him, and he gobbled up a large number of trophies. Calling that back to the original point about definitions, I think that's a bit more inclusive than the one you chose. That would also include such seasons and McEnroe's 1984, Djokovic's 2011 and 2015, and Connors' 1974, which would immediately come to mind, amongst no doubt, numerous others. Notice that it doesn't matter too much to me that Federer managed the victory over Djokovic at RG in 2011, because IIRC, Djokovic beat Federer numerous other times that season, which sets that matchup apart from Federer's record vs. Nadal in 2006.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Now we're interrogating the definition of "dominated the entire tour for periods of time". If your definition prevails, ie. winning all four slams, then yes, only Laver. That was not my definition, because it would be too exclusive and therefore not much help. I was also not saying Nadal had won every tournament and every match, because obviously that would exclude every case in history. I was using Federer's 2006, in which he beat everyone except Nadal, who he couldn't beat even once, and Murray, who, IIRC, he managed one victory and one loss. The latter matchup was obviously inconclusive, but the 0-5 against Nadal isn't.

I'm saying that Nadal went through a few seasons, such as 2008, 2010, and 2013, where no one player was good enough to consistently beat him, and he gobbled up a large number of trophies. Calling that back to the original point about definitions, I think that's a bit more inclusive than the one you chose. That would also include such seasons and McEnroe's 1984, Djokovic's 2011 and 2015, and Connors' 1974, which would immediately come to mind, amongst no doubt, numerous others. Notice that it doesn't matter too much to me that Federer managed the victory over Djokovic at RG in 2011, because IIRC, Djokovic beat Federer numerous other times that season, which sets that matchup apart from Federer's record vs. Nadal in 2006.

Federer did beat Nadal once in 2006 at the YEC. 1 loss at Dubai and 3 on clay at MC, Rome and RG. He also beat Djokovic 3 times in 2015.

The other part doesn't make sense. In 2008 Nadal lost at both HC grand slams in the SF. Murray beat him at the 2010 AO, Fed beat him at the WTF. 2013 he lost early at Wimbledon and lost to Nole at WTF.

All those losses means he didn't dominate the tour in the way your definition says. His 08, 10, 13 seasons are worse than Federer's 04, 06 and 07 seasons with 1 less grand slam and / or no WTF.

Also Nadal had 11 losses in 2008, 10 in 2010 and 7 in 2013. 6 in 2004, 4 in 2005 and 5 in 2006, 9 in 2007 so Federer dominated his rivals more than Nadal did who lost more.
 
Last edited:
Top